| Gregg Smith has a worthwhile post up on BAC that people should read. I'm not going to go into all the reasons that I've been frustrated (not outraged) by the handling of this incident.
For what it is worth, I appreciate Gregg's writeup here. I've heard similar, although less detailed comments, from members of Montana's press corps. What I hadn't seen was a public writeup someone would stand by.
Dan Testa linked to the piece, which I how found it. That's good of him. It is also helpful, by the way, to report these pieces. If you're aware that there's a lot of speculation that a .05 BAC indicates more than a beer-and-a-half, but experts say, "Well, it could be this way" that's helpful information to put in the public sphere.
So, mea culpa. I ain't a forensic scientist or a toxicologist. I was wrong. The simple science indicates that there was a chance that Rep. Rehberg was legally drunk when he got on the boat (something I still don't understanding being a big deal since he wasn't driving), but it doesn't guarantee it.
Some commenters elsewhere have attacked my previous post because even if Rehberg was drunk, it doesn't matter. To some extent, that was my point. I thought the math proved he was lying about an insignificant matter. That bothers me. Taking responsibility is a good thing.
So final word: read Gregg's post. Keep contributing thoughts if you have them and yea for the online feedback loop. |
